1. The defendant shall pay 23,807,068 won to the plaintiff A, 4,000,000 won to the plaintiff B, and 2,000,000 won to the plaintiff C and D, respectively.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a company that aims at the manufacture and sale of set, manufacturing and wholesale business of wood and wooden boxes, and the plaintiff A around March 4, 1996 according to the evidence No. 2 of the plaintiff A around March 4, 1996, the plaintiff's entry and sale date of the plaintiff A was March 1, 1998; however, the plaintiff actually entered on March 4, 1996.

The defendant does not dispute this.

A person who has entered into an employment contract with the defendant and works in the defendant's workplace.

B. From June 22, 2016 to August 12, 2016, Plaintiff A received medical treatment at F Hospital, and was diagnosed as “phomatic disorder of the unknown pathy,” and filed a claim for disability benefits with the Labor Welfare Corporation.

(c)

According to the request for medical examination of industrial accident compensation insurance by the Labor Welfare Corporation, Plaintiff A was inspected on May 29, 2019 at G hospital on June 4, 2019, and on June 3, 2019, at G hospital on the three occasions. According to the prudent test, Plaintiff A responded to the following medical opinions on June 11, 2019: “Woodo, Gado minimum price ( home good price): dB (8/73.3) of rain (83/73/71.2) (83/71.2)”, language lusium test [a 40% ( normal price = 100%), and 60% on the left-hand side of the hospital.

가) 검사결과에서 고막 또는 중이에 뚜렷한 병변이 관찰되는지 여부 ⇒ 없음 나) 난청의 원인과 정확한 상 병명은 ⇒ 소음성 난청 다) 검사결과, 내이 염 ㆍ 약품 중독 ㆍ 열성질환 ㆍ에 니에 르 씨 증후군 ㆍ 매독 ㆍ 두부 외상 ㆍ 돌발성 난청 ㆍ 유전성 난청 ㆍ 가족성 난청 ㆍ 노인성 난청 또는 재해성 폭발음 등에 의한 난청 여부 ⇒ 없음 라) 순음 청력검사결과 기도 청력 역치와 골도 청력 역치 사이에 뚜렷한 차이가 있는지 및 청력 장해가 저음 역보다 고음 역에서 큰지 여부 ⇒ 고음 역 저하가 큼 마) 검사결과가 상기 난청의 측정방법 (2) 의 모든 항목 요건을 충족하는지 여부 ⇒ 충족함 바) 검사결과의 신뢰성 여부 및 기타 소견 ⇒ 순음 청력검사와 어음 청취 역치 간에...